-
The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants
Authors:
Iason Gabriel,
Arianna Manzini,
Geoff Keeling,
Lisa Anne Hendricks,
Verena Rieser,
Hasan Iqbal,
Nenad TomaĊĦev,
Ira Ktena,
Zachary Kenton,
Mikel Rodriguez,
Seliem El-Sayed,
Sasha Brown,
Canfer Akbulut,
Andrew Trask,
Edward Hughes,
A. Stevie Bergman,
Renee Shelby,
Nahema Marchal,
Conor Griffin,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Laura Weidinger,
Winnie Street,
Benjamin Lange,
Alex Ingerman,
Alison Lentz
, et al. (32 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, pro…
▽ More
This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, providing an overview of AI assistants, their technical foundations and potential range of applications. It then explores questions around AI value alignment, well-being, safety and malicious uses. Extending the circle of inquiry further, we next consider the relationship between advanced AI assistants and individual users in more detail, exploring topics such as manipulation and persuasion, anthropomorphism, appropriate relationships, trust and privacy. With this analysis in place, we consider the deployment of advanced assistants at a societal scale, focusing on cooperation, equity and access, misinformation, economic impact, the environment and how best to evaluate advanced AI assistants. Finally, we conclude by providing a range of recommendations for researchers, developers, policymakers and public stakeholders.
△ Less
Submitted 28 April, 2024; v1 submitted 24 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
AlphaFold two years on: validation and impact
Authors:
Oleg Kovalevskiy,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Kathryn Tunyasuvunakool
Abstract:
Two years on from the initial release of AlphaFold2 we have seen its widespread adoption as a structure prediction tool. Here we discuss some of the latest work based on AlphaFold2, with a particular focus on its use within the structural biology community. This encompasses use cases like speeding up structure determination itself, enabling new computational studies, and building new tools and wor…
▽ More
Two years on from the initial release of AlphaFold2 we have seen its widespread adoption as a structure prediction tool. Here we discuss some of the latest work based on AlphaFold2, with a particular focus on its use within the structural biology community. This encompasses use cases like speeding up structure determination itself, enabling new computational studies, and building new tools and workflows. We also look at the ongoing validation of AlphaFold2, as its predictions continue to be compared against large numbers of experimental structures to further delineate the model's capabilities and limitations.
△ Less
Submitted 4 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systems
Authors:
Laura Weidinger,
Maribeth Rauh,
Nahema Marchal,
Arianna Manzini,
Lisa Anne Hendricks,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Stevie Bergman,
Jackie Kay,
Conor Griffin,
Ben Bariach,
Iason Gabriel,
Verena Rieser,
William Isaac
Abstract:
Generative AI systems produce a range of risks. To ensure the safety of generative AI systems, these risks must be evaluated. In this paper, we make two main contributions toward establishing such evaluations. First, we propose a three-layered framework that takes a structured, sociotechnical approach to evaluating these risks. This framework encompasses capability evaluations, which are the main…
▽ More
Generative AI systems produce a range of risks. To ensure the safety of generative AI systems, these risks must be evaluated. In this paper, we make two main contributions toward establishing such evaluations. First, we propose a three-layered framework that takes a structured, sociotechnical approach to evaluating these risks. This framework encompasses capability evaluations, which are the main current approach to safety evaluation. It then reaches further by building on system safety principles, particularly the insight that context determines whether a given capability may cause harm. To account for relevant context, our framework adds human interaction and systemic impacts as additional layers of evaluation. Second, we survey the current state of safety evaluation of generative AI systems and create a repository of existing evaluations. Three salient evaluation gaps emerge from this analysis. We propose ways forward to closing these gaps, outlining practical steps as well as roles and responsibilities for different actors. Sociotechnical safety evaluation is a tractable approach to the robust and comprehensive safety evaluation of generative AI systems.
△ Less
Submitted 31 October, 2023; v1 submitted 18 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
The Privatization of AI Research(-ers): Causes and Potential Consequences -- From university-industry interaction to public research brain-drain?
Authors:
Roman Jurowetzki,
Daniel Hain,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Konstantinos Stathoulopoulos
Abstract:
The private sector is playing an increasingly important role in basic Artificial Intelligence (AI) R&D. This phenomenon, which is reflected in the perception of a brain drain of researchers from academia to industry, is raising concerns about a privatisation of AI research which could constrain its societal benefits. We contribute to the evidence base by quantifying transition flows between indust…
▽ More
The private sector is playing an increasingly important role in basic Artificial Intelligence (AI) R&D. This phenomenon, which is reflected in the perception of a brain drain of researchers from academia to industry, is raising concerns about a privatisation of AI research which could constrain its societal benefits. We contribute to the evidence base by quantifying transition flows between industry and academia and studying its drivers and potential consequences. We find a growing net flow of researchers from academia to industry, particularly from elite institutions into technology companies such as Google, Microsoft and Facebook. Our survival regression analysis reveals that researchers working in the field of deep learning as well as those with higher average impact are more likely to transition into industry. A difference-in-differences analysis of the effect of switching into industry on a researcher's influence proxied by citations indicates that an initial increase in impact declines as researchers spend more time in industry. This points at a privatisation of AI knowledge compared to a counterfactual where those high-impact researchers had remained in academia. Our findings highlight the importance of strengthening the public AI research sphere in order to ensure that the future of this powerful technology is not dominated by private interests.
△ Less
Submitted 15 February, 2021; v1 submitted 2 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
A narrowing of AI research?
Authors:
Joel Klinger,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Konstantinos Stathoulopoulos
Abstract:
The arrival of deep learning techniques able to infer patterns from large datasets has dramatically improved the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. Deep learning's rapid development and adoption, in great part led by large technology companies, has however created concerns about a premature narrowing in the technological trajectory of AI research despite its weaknesses, which inc…
▽ More
The arrival of deep learning techniques able to infer patterns from large datasets has dramatically improved the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. Deep learning's rapid development and adoption, in great part led by large technology companies, has however created concerns about a premature narrowing in the technological trajectory of AI research despite its weaknesses, which include lack of robustness, high environmental costs, and potentially unfair outcomes. We seek to improve the evidence base with a semantic analysis of AI research in arXiv, a popular pre-prints database. We study the evolution of the thematic diversity of AI research, compare the thematic diversity of AI research in academia and the private sector and measure the influence of private companies in AI research through the citations they receive and their collaborations with other institutions. Our results suggest that diversity in AI research has stagnated in recent years, and that AI research involving the private sector tends to be less diverse and more influential than research in academia. We also find that private sector AI researchers tend to specialise in data-hungry and computationally intensive deep learning methods at the expense of research involving other AI methods, research that considers the societal and ethical implications of AI, and applications in sectors like health. Our results provide a rationale for policy action to prevent a premature narrowing of AI research that could constrain its societal benefits, but we note the informational, incentive and scale hurdles standing in the way of such interventions.
△ Less
Submitted 11 January, 2022; v1 submitted 22 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
-
Deep learning, deep change? Map** the development of the Artificial Intelligence General Purpose Technology
Authors:
J. Klinger,
J. Mateos-Garcia,
K. Stathoulopoulos
Abstract:
General Purpose Technologies (GPTs) that can be applied in many industries are an important driver of economic growth and national and regional competitiveness. In spite of this, the geography of their development and diffusion has not received significant attention in the literature. We address this with an analysis of Deep Learning (DL), a core technique in Artificial Intelligence (AI) increasin…
▽ More
General Purpose Technologies (GPTs) that can be applied in many industries are an important driver of economic growth and national and regional competitiveness. In spite of this, the geography of their development and diffusion has not received significant attention in the literature. We address this with an analysis of Deep Learning (DL), a core technique in Artificial Intelligence (AI) increasingly being recognized as the latest GPT. We identify DL papers in a novel dataset from ArXiv, a popular preprints website, and use CrunchBase, a technology business directory to measure industrial capabilities related to it. After showing that DL conforms with the definition of a GPT, having experienced rapid growth and diffusion into new fields where it has generated an impact, we describe changes in its geography. Our analysis shows China's rise in AI rankings and relative decline in several European countries. We also find that initial volatility in the geography of DL has been followed by consolidation, suggesting that the window of opportunity for new entrants might be closing down as new DL research hubs become dominant. Finally, we study the regional drivers of DL clustering. We find that competitive DL clusters tend to be based in regions combining research and industrial activities related to it. This could be because GPT developers and adopters located close to each other can collaborate and share knowledge more easily, thus overcoming coordination failures in GPT deployment. Our analysis also reveals a Chinese comparative advantage in DL after we control for other explanatory factors, perhaps underscoring the importance of access to data and supportive policies for the successful development of this complex, `omni-use' technology.
△ Less
Submitted 20 August, 2018;
originally announced August 2018.
